>>> if God has already chosen who will be saved, it negates at least some of our personal responsibility in calling people to respond to the gospel.

Fact is that God does NOT choose who will be saved, but He DOES know who will be saved. It is entirely possible to know an outcome without influencing it directly.

If God does not know, then He is not God.

If we have free will, then that gift of free will came from God... and if God gives it, He must also accept the consequences of that choice. This is why he allows those whom He knows will perish to exist to begin with; because the first man (Adam) made the choice to rebel.

Just because He knows, doesn’t mean we don’t have a choice.
It simply means that God exists outside of our perception of time and space. He allows those whom He knows will perish to run their course for the benefit of those whom He knows will turn to Him.

God uses all things for good.

I don’t understand why I’m supposed to be offended because I understand this, and anti-Calvinists do not.

>>> I really hope you are joking because that is the dumbest thing I have heard in ages. Viruses alter our DNA all the time.

There are many things in the bible which sound pretty dumb and even inconceivable... and yet we are seeing them come to pass daily.

My speculation on what form the mark of the beast could take is just as plausible as anything else. Everything you gave as an example to refute my point does not physically change us into something we are not.

The next step will be to have the microchip actually alter the DNA instead of just reading it, thus corrupting the Image in which we were made, and permanently separating the recipient from any hope of salvation.

I do not know, but highly suspect that THIS will be what the actual mark of the beast is.

>>> Personally, itd be just as good to remove the State of the Union address and make it a written report instead, thus denying him a chance to stand in front of both the House and Senate, and make a public speech.

Oh... but that would be racist... and would be treated by the media even more harshly than an attempt to impeach him.

See... the GOP is simply damned if it does, and damned if it doesn’t... So,

>>> Grace is paying for the sins we committed before we had knowledge of his Way, not for the arrogance of demanding a get-out-of-hell-free card.

You keep referring to the Gift of God as a “get-out-of-hell-free card”.
By relating the price paid for our sin to a game card, you diminish the work of Christ in mocking fashion.

For us the sinner, the gift of salvation IS free... it costs us NOTHING... otherwise it would not be a gift. Would you deny that salvation is a gift? I wonder.
Regardless, the “get-out-of-hell-free” card as you put it is nothing of the sort... while it costs us nothing, it cost God EVERYTHING! Our salvation is NOT free! It cost Jesus more than anyone will ever know... and for you to cheapen his sacrifice in this way invites God’s wrath.
One could even argue that such mockery of God’s gift is to speak against the Holy Spirit... because His ministry and sacrifice WAS and IS a work of the Holy Spirit. I am not claiming that you are guilty of the unforgivable sin. I am saying that you are treading on very thin ice.

>>> You appear to believe that it is impossible to keep Torah, is that so?

It is possible to keep the Torah, but not to perfection... which IS the standard for holiness.

Recall the rich man who approached Jesus and asked what he needed to do to gain eternal life:

Mat 19:16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet? Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me. But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.

You see, the rich man THOUGHT he was perfect. Jesus showed him that he actually was not. The rich man was unwilling to part with his possessions. The rich man was relying upon his own righteousness. Keep reading in that same passage... you will see that salvation is a gift of God that cannot be earned with deeds or righteousness.

>>> Nobody here has said that we are saved by keeping his commandments; we have old sins that have to be forgiven to be saved, but he who keeps on sinning (transgressing Torah) after learning Yeshua's Way will not be saved. Hebrews 6 is no joke, nor is Matthew 7:23, nor Romans 2.

Actually, you did say it. You said that those who are righteous get the pass. However, in reference to past versus future sins, it does not make sense that Christs sacrifice on the cross would apply to only those sins committed up to the time of conversion, because the believer would then be held to a higher standard than the unbeliever... without the benefit of incorruptibility which we don't receive until the death of our corrupted body. In as far as consequences go which you referenced in Hebrews 6, etc., "death" in scripture does not always refer to eternal damnation. It often refers to physical destruction of the body. If I continue in sin, even after God warns me to stop, He most certainly will end my time on earth even though my place in heaven is secure.

>>> Nothing you have posted to me has any reasonable relationship to what I have posted to you.

Now you are making sense.

You go right ahead and choose to stand before God according to your own righteousness.

I’ll rely upon the righteousness of Christ, and His shed blood for my sins.

If Jesus and His apostles taught reliance upon the torah for salvation, then the Pharisees would have had no argument with Him whatsoever... and He would not have been brought up on charges of blasphemy and crucified... nor would the apostles and Christians who followed Him been hunted down and killed for their beliefs.

Do I think John was wrong??? No... but I think the straw-man you made out of him is.

>>> To me this seems simple and clear; he who is righteous gets the pass. If we truly know him, he has written his Torah on our heart. If he has written Torah on our heart, we love his Torah, and keep it out of love. If that is not where you are, then you are not in him!

If you consider yourself righteous under the law, then the truth is not in you.

You cannot come to truly know Him until you recognize that you are incapable of righteousness under the law, and instead rely upon His sacrifice on the cross which PAID for your unrighteousness.

When you stand before God, He will judge you according to your righteousness, or He will judge you according to the righteousness of Christ who took on and bore the penalty for your sins in your stead.

You cannot have it both ways. It’s either Christ’s blood sacrifice that saves you, or your ability to follow the law to perfection... which IS the standard of holiness.

Christ was perfect FOR us.

If we recognize that, and believe it, we will naturally respond in love and SEEK to follow in His example, even though we know we will not always succeed.

>>> Are you trying to make the point that ONLY ‘false teachers’ will be ‘worse off’?

No... I said that “They” are defined starting in verse 9 and 10, and further described in verses 11-19. Summarily they are referred to in verse 9 as “the unjust”.

To me, I see the “unjust” described in verses 11-19 as all those who for whatever reason hate all things righteous and lust after everything that is unclean. This would certainly include false teachers, but is not limited to them.

My point was that taking verse 20 out of context and using it to refer to people of faith is completely out of line with the previous 10 verses.

>>>  If NOBODY is yet saved, then salvation must come after death. Youre just figuring that out? For all but the final generation, that is the undeniable fact that Yeshua and his apostles were trying to get across.

Is this the Catholic teaching? or your personal conviction?

Heb 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:

Romans 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

Romans 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

Rom 3:20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

Jas 2:10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.

Actually, there are many truths that are not specifically spelled out for us in easy-to-read one-liners. Some truths are left for us to seek and find in scripture with the council of the Holy Spirit.

I’m having a really hard time with your argument, which is why I took so long to respond...

You say that NOBODY is yet saved, but then claim Jesus was describing how the re-born are enabled to travel invisibly through our PRESENT dwelling place like the wind. This is a self contradicting statement. We become saved during our life on earth, or we do not. If NOBODY is yet saved, then salvation must come after death.

Jesus said in the passage you referenced that we must be born again to be saved. That is what is clear and relevant... so the question becomes “When are we born-again?” When you say that NOBODY is yet saved because salvation lies in spiritual rebirth, I can only surmise that what you are saying is that we are not reborn until after we die, OR that we cannot know that we are saved until after we die.

>>> We must endure to the end, as Yeshua plainly stated in Matthew 24, and as repeated by all of the apostles numerous times in the various epistles.

Chuck Missler made the observation that there is more in the bible about end times than any other subject in the bible, including the subject of Jesus’ ministry on earth.

Such is the case with Matthew 24 in which Jesus is responding to a question about the end of days. We are currently living in the age of Grace. While the Holy Spirit resides here on earth, salvation is promised to those who repent and believe in Jesus. Once the Holy Spirit lifts His hand from the earth, the age of grace ends, and what begins is testing and judgment of the nations. Salvation at that point takes on an additional requirement, namely that believers NOT take the mark of the beast. “Enduring to the end” is a tribulation era reference only. By applying this phrase to the church age, you must also define specifically WHAT is to be endured... because Jesus specifically lays out in Matt 24 what is to be endured DURING THE TRIBULATION in order to be saved.

Your references from Colossians and Hebrews are identical, and speak of “What we believe”... not what we do or fail to do.

Your reference from 2 Peter however is quite different.
“They” needs to be defined, and we find that definition by bringing into context the previous verses starting in verse 9:

2:9 - “The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished: But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government.”

Verses 10-19 further defines “they”, and as you read through it, it becomes very clear to whom God is referring;

Quite simply, “they” are those who are being preserved for judgment... those who are openly defiant of God and what He stands for. It is their knowledge of the truth that would make it better for them to have not been born to begin with, because their punishment is that much worse than those who simply failed to find the Truth.

I submit that those who are being defined as “they” are quite different than those who lose or lack faith.

Furthermore, the premise that “they had previously escaped the corruption of the world” refers to born again Christians is grammatically false when placed in context with the previous verse;

In verse 19 we see this: “While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage. “

“They” are the deceivers promising liberty to those (them) whom they seek to corrupt... and the following verse 20 which you referenced is a paradoxical argument which illustrates that “they” indeed have NOT escaped the pollutions of the world BECAUSE they are themselves servants of corruption.

Your post centers around the discussion of religion, and yet you say it has nothing to do with God?

I find it interesting that you exclude unbelievers (atheists) or at least categorize them as deniers... as if they know, but refuse their belief.

I also find it interesting that you have an accurate assessment of mankind’s inability or at least his limitations when it comes to altering creation.

I am curious though why it is important to an agnostic leaning denier what other’s believe or deny and why.

What does an agnostic believe? What is denied? Is the central reason for unbelief or denial based on a feeling? or on facts?

What is the purpose of denial? (of anything)
Does rejection of an idea or concept lead to the discovery of anything? or does it by itself only end in continued ignorance of an answer to the original question?

The difference is that they fail to recognize Whom He has sent as messiah... Not out of rebellion, but rather out of ignorance and pride. God deals with them during the tribulation. The two cannot be related.